Viral photo tries to re-paint Trayvon and Zimmerman, but is fake
Tue, 27 Mar 2012 21:33:47 GMT —
A picture attempting to reveal competing views of 17-year old Trayvon Martin who was shot and killed in Florida by neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman has been making the rounds on the internet.
Circulated on social media sites and via e-mail...the picture compares and contrasts different photos of both in an attempt to point out "media bias" in coverage of the incident.
The problem? One of the photos is not of Trayvon Martin. At least not the one that was shot and killed.
In the photo series, you see a sullen looking Zimmerman, the image that most in the media are using to represent him. It's actually a booking photo from back in 2005.
The picture of Trayvon Martin is one of him happy and smiling...looking rather innocent...and is, according to sources, from several years ago.
The comparison photos try to paint a different picture. The one of Zimmerman shows him happy and smiling and was taken recently...and the one of Martin, allegedly taken from his Facebook page, shows him shirtless in a knit hat wearing saggy pants with both middle fingers displayed for the camera.
It's the one with the middle fingers that isn't the Trayvon Martin that was shot...but is, instead, a different Trayvon Martin.
The image quickly circulated across blogs and websites, with many claiming it as evidence that Martin was not as innocent as family and supporters claimed, as well as alleging media bias.
Street Wise Pundit, a liberal blog, claims the widely circulated "fake" Trayvon Martin picture originated on a white supremacist website.
Several media websites picked up the "fake" photo...only having to pull it down later and issue a correction that the photo was indeed not the Trayvon Martin that was shot and killed.
(Editor's Note: we, as in WNWO, blurred out the source on the side of the photo...and the "middle fingers").
Why do you think the photograph was circulated in the first place? Was it an attempt to point out media bias? Or simply race-baiting? Should the media be using the older photo of Zimmerman? Or should they be using the more recent one of him smiling? Is how each is being represented in the media shaping our opinion of the facts in the case?